NWA742, please. If you really look at American products in general, and there are exceptions, they are losing market share because of generally outdated products. That is a fact, you do the research and it will show the worsening positions these companies are in right now. Bob Lutz has said that publicly many times about GM
's products, basically saying they are crap and they need a major overhaul. He also attributes GM
's losing market share on the poor products.
BMW didn't design the X5
with an "off-road" suspension. BMW's aren't off-road vehicles. It set out to design a package that would be the best it could for on-road use, without the disadvantages inherent in vehicles that are designed to excel off-road. Guess what? They succeeded! Find me ANY American vehicle with the on-road dynamics to match the X5
? The fact that it sucks off-road is irrelevant to its owners. Now, that doesn't make it a minivan, but more like a raised sports car.
Regarding the engineering that goes into a BMW, yes, it's true. I don't have stated facts to support this, but they are clearly designed to different standards than the American offerings. Open the doors, check out the brakes, look at the advanced suspension design and its capabilities, check out the crash performance, see the fit and finish, and the materials used in the interiors, also look at the engines that are more advanced, with only the Northstar being a comparable American engine. These are facts and not opinions. Besides, anybody except a die-hard GM
fan will acknowledge this. Why you're blind to this is beyond me.
Where do you get the "fact" that the Trailblazer has the strongest body of any SUV
? I'd like to see that "fact." I know an idiot who had an Envoy (same as the Trailblazer) and he got the damned thing written off after a slow speed crash where he slid off the road and hit a rock. He was accelerating out of a gas station, lost control and slid off the road. He claims he hit at well under 20 km/h. The airbags didn't deploy, which proves this was a slow hit. The vehicle was written off (2 months old) because the frame was bent beyond repair. Doesn't bode too well for the stiffest SUV
out there. Also, being the stiffest, it should do exceptionally well in crash tests, when it got 3 stars for frontal impact, and Marginal rating (right behind poor) from the IIHS. Those are facts, not opinions.
I agree that Acuras are cheaper than BMW's. It helps that Acuras are based on Honda platforms, and are often more pedestrian designs (nothing wrong with that, Acuras are also more practical than BMW's) so they are cheaper to manufacture. Why can't you accept the fact that BMW puts more money into their products and therefore charges more? I'm the first to admit that BMW's are not high value cars. They are specialty cars designed for those who truly appreciate the best a great driving experience.
I drive a VW
, and Consumers Reports also does not always rate VW
's highly in reliability. Guess what, my VW
has been exceptionally reliable. However, if they report a car is crappy, it means that you are more likely to have problems with that car than a good car. Why can't you accept that?
Look ... GM
vehicles make sense for lots of people. But they are designed down to a very low standard. That is how they keep their costs down. It is how they can be priced lower than a lot of the competition, and still offer rebates and 0% financing, and still make some money. But please do not tell me that the majority of GM
products are made to the same standards as most imports, including BMW's and the such. Camaros give more bang for the buck than the 350Z (keeping this relevant to the thread), but the 350Z will otherwise outshine the Camaros in every other area.
"it's kind of like an Airbus, it's an engineering marvel, but there's no sense of passion" -- J. Clarkson re: Coxster